ArticleBMC bioinformatics2016
Protein-protein interaction extraction with feature selection by evaluating contribution levels of groups consisting of related features.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Using a Large Margin Context-Aware Convolutional Neural Network to Automatically Extract Disease-Disease Association from Literature: Comparative Analytic Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2019Article
- HMNPPID-human malignant neoplasm protein-protein interaction database.Human genomics · 2019Article
- Identification of conclusive association entities in biomedical articles.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2019Article
- Leveraging prior knowledge for protein-protein interaction extraction with memory network.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2018Article
- Distributed smoothed tree kernel for protein-protein interaction extraction from the biomedical literature.PloS one · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProtein-protein interaction (PPI) extraction from published scientific articles is one key issue in biological research due to its importance in grasping biological processes. Despite considerable advances of recent research in automatic PPI extraction from articles, demand remains to enhance the performance of the existing methods.
resultsOur feature-based method incorporates the strength of many kinds of diverse features, such as lexical and word context features derived from sentences, syntactic features derived from parse trees, and features using existing patterns to extract PPIs automatically from articles. Among these abundant features, we assemble the related features into four groups and define the contribution level (CL) for each group, which consists of related features. Our method consists of two steps. First, we divide the training set into subsets based on the structure of the sentence and the existence of significant keywords (SKs) and apply the sentence patterns given in advance to each subset. Second, we automatically perform feature selection based on the CL values of the four groups that consist of related features and the k-nearest neighbor algorithm (k-NN) through three approaches: (1) focusing on the group with the best contribution level (BEST1G); (2) unoptimized combination of three groups with the best contribution levels (U3G); (3) optimized combination of two groups with the best contribution levels (O2G).
conclusionsOur method outperforms other state-of-the-art PPI extraction systems in terms of F-score on the HPRD50 corpus and achieves promising results that are comparable with these PPI extraction systems on other corpora. Further, our method always obtains the best F-score on all the corpora than when using k-NN only without exploiting the CLs of the groups of related features.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.